Sunday, October 30, 2005

Congratulations to SSHRC on adopting open access in principle. Here is my response, as a librarian with a special interest in scholarly communications, and an open access advocate. A copy of this letter will be posted on my blog, The Imaginary Journal of Poetic Economics.

In brief, my response is a recommendation that SSHRC policy be to require open access to the results of SSHRC funded research, as defined in the Budapest Open Access Initiative, basically immediate, free, and unrestricted online availability. Specifically, my recommendation is to require deposit in an institutional repository, and to make open access a requirement for SSHRC subsidy funding for publishers. Detailed responses to specific consultation questions follows.

Policy Questions

SSHRC requests your advice on the following general policy issues: • Should SSHRC adopt a regulation requiring that one copy of all research results be deposited in an institutional repository?

Yes.

Researchers should place articles in institutional repositories even when they are making works openly available by other means, such as placing articles in subject repositories or publishing in open access journals. This is the best way for Canadian universities, individually and as a whole, to highlight the value of Canadian research, and ensure its preservation. This approach also facilitates the development of Canadian-based portals, enhancing our ability to search for Canadian-specific materials.

• Should there be exceptions for research outputs where there is an expectation of financial return to the author (i.e., monographs where royalties are accrued)?

If all of the research and writings costs are covered by SSHRC, there should be no exceptions. However, authors should be free to use a noncommercial creative commons license, e.g. an electronic, free open access copy of a monograph should not preclude sales of a print version.

Operational Questions

In general, there are two accepted routes to open access: • Self-archiving – depositing research results and materials in institutional repositories that can be searched by anyone with Internet access; and, • Open access electronic journals – peer-reviewed journals that provide Internet-based access for readers without subscription charges.

Both routes present SSHRC and the research community with operational challenges:

1 Institutional repositories: Building a management and service platform

Currently, not all Canadian universities provide an institutional repository service. Some 26 repositories are now in place, or are in development, but this does not yet provide the necessary services for all SSHRC-funded researchers.

General comment:If researchers do not yet have an institutional repository available, there are several options that can be explored. For example, universities with repositories can make space available to authors from other institutions; universities can develop repositories on a collaborative rather than individual basis; SSHRC could develop a central repository, or, there is a universal depository currently under development that is expected to be available this fall.

a If required by SSHRC, would you be willing to send all outputs from SSHRC-funded research to an institutional repository?

For me, depositing work in an institutional repository is not an obligation, but rather a pleasure my IR is a much appreciated service. For details on why I just love my institutional repository – as I am sure other authors, universities and academia as a whole will in the future – please see my blogpost, “the Institutional Repository, the Author and the Academy of Aug. 7, 2005, at: http://tinyurl.com/9d7ln(http://poeticeconomics.blogspot.com/2005_08_07_poeticeconomics_archive.html)

b What range of electronic publications and institutional repository services are needed to fully meet the needs of the scholarly community? See, for example Érudit.org (www.erudit.org), a Quebec-based electronic service provider. Should this model be extended across Canada?

The ideal is institutional repository services available to every researcher across Canada, and a range of Canadian-based electronic publication outlets, to assure that research of particular importance in the Canadian context is published. The Synergies group , which includes Érudit, represents one very good model for cross-country collaboration. In my view, it is particularly useful to help with the publishing software and technology needs, as with the Open Journal Systems. [Disclosure: I work for Simon Fraser University, which is a partner in Open Journal Systems and Synergies, although I am not involved with these projects].

2 Open access journals: Revising the SSHRC Aid to Research and Transfer Journals Program

Although SSHRC financially supports the majority of social science and humanities journals produced in Canada , the Aid to Research and Transfer Journals Program does not provide support for non-subscription based journals.

Comment: open access is the most effective means of disseminating results of SSHRC funded research. Picture the difference in accessibility between a journal that meets the current minimum of 200 subscribers, with an open access journal.

200 subscribers: an article published in such a journal might be readily available at every university library in Canada, a few individual researchers, and some of the major research libraries elsewhere in the world.

Open access: can be readily accessed by anyone, anywhere in the world with an internet connection – from the college student in Canada’s north, studying at an institution with a small library – to a researcher in another country who may take the results of research conducted in Canada and build on them, to develop ideas, solutions, and new questions that help Canadians in their research endeavors.

Therefore, my recommendation is that the 200-subscriber minimum should not only be eliminated, but that open access should be a requirement for a SSHRC publication subsidy. Other metrics designed to measure usage can replace the number of subscribers, such as downloads. While these kinds of measures are imperfect, it should be noted that the current approach (subscribers) also have limits. Another approach would be to ask scholars to review the quality and importance of the journals.

a Scholarly peer-reviewed journals play a crucial role in the certification of research knowledge. In the context of open access, institutional repositories must be able to distinguish between peer-reviewed and non-peer-reviewed research outputs. Therefore, the continued existence, and financial viability, of journals is clearly a critical issue.

Please comment on each of the three following possible ways to tackle this challenge, taking into consideration the fact that there are limited resources for the support of research: • A “moving wall” system where journal articles are available only by subscription for the first six months, and then made available free of charge.

This is not open access, and this does not provide the best service to the Canadian research community. As an example, if a Canadian researcher and an international researcher conduct similar research and come to similar results at the same time, what happens if the Canadian publishes in a Canadian-based journal with a subscriber base of 200, while the international researcher publishes in an open access journal or an international journal with a much wider readership base? It seems likely that the work of the international researcher will be much more likely to be read, cited, and used. Immediate open access places the Canadian researcher and publisher on a level playing field at the international level; the “moving wall’ approach does not.

• A publication fee, charged by journals to authors, to be considered an eligible expense within a SSHRC research grant. This would require researchers to have access to SSHRC or other grant funds.

Good idea, and I would suggest that this be considered in addition to SSHRC funding for publications. This is one means to facilitate the move to open access or creation of new open access journals which are not covered by SSHRC funding. This would make it easier for Canadian researchers to create new journals in emerging fields, for example. Used in combination with other approaches, such as funding of fully open access journals, this provides options to authors, whether they are SSHRC funded or not.

• A modification to the SSHRC support program for journals—which currently covers 40 to 50 per cent of journal expenditures—to allow grants to cover all peer review, administration and manuscript preparation costs, but not costs associated with distribution.

Good idea, and should be accompanied by an expectation of open access.

b As journal editors, do you allow your contributing authors to place their accepted articles in an institutional repository or on a Web site not connected with the journal? Why, or why not?

N/a

c As researchers/authors, would you be willing to comply with a SSHRC regulation that requires peer-reviewed articles to be published in an open access journal and/or placed in a publicly-accessible institutional repository?

As noted above, I happily deposit my work in an institutional repository, with no obligation. I should note that I have never received or applied for SSRHC funding.

Many thanks for the opportunity to participate in this consultation process. Questions are welcome

Friday, October 14, 2005

Here is a thought for the SSHRC Consultation on Open Access: why wait until publication for open access? Indeed - why wait until the research is completed, or even begun?

What if a researcher were to post the details of a SSHRC funded research grant just as soon as confirmation of the funding was received? What if this were linked to background information, and supplemented by research data as soon as it was available? Then each draft of the research report as it became available - along with openly available peer reviews, then the final peer-reviewed versions when this was available?

With this approach, Canadians (and others, of course) could watch the research as it progressed. For some researchers, this might help to attract needed study participants. In some cases, perhaps students at various levels could conduct some of the research - or, perhaps the students could carry out parallel studies. Would there be excitement? There is no suspense with a completed study - but what about research in progress, where the results are not yet known?

Could watching and participating in research become as exciting as watching reality t.v. - or moreso, since this is real knowledge that is being created?

Would this open approach help to develop science and information literacy, and help to cultivate a new generation of keen researchers?

Would this mean interesting material for journalists - and more meaningful and positive news for the rest of us? Would the net effect be more public support for research in general - and humanities and social sciences research in particular?

This would really be embracing the medium.

[Series note: this is the 3rd post in the "Embracing the Medium" series}.

This post reflects my personal opinion only and does not represent the opinions or policy of the BC Electronic Library Network or the Simon Fraser University Library.

A delightful irony of open access: the poor, it seems, can afford,what the rich cannot.

The Latin American countries have long been leaders on the gold road,with their Scielo project. The Indian Institute of Sciences is oneof the leaders in the green road, with a relatively institutionalrepository. Either approach, some people seem to think, could not befollowed in places like the U.K. or the U.S. without some sort ofdisaster befalling the scholarly publishing industry.

Finally, for a while at least, people in the poorer countries have anopportunity to catch up. The OA impact advantage may only betemporary, until all scholarly knowledge is OA. In the meantime, ifthe researchers in place like Chile and India have a bit of an accessedge, this has its upside as well.

Unlike the OA impact advantage studies, this is not based on anyscientific evidence at all. This is purely whimsical speculation,brought to you by:

Heather Morrisonhttp://poeticeconomics.blogspot.com

Originally posted to the SPARC Open Access Forum, October 4, 2005

This post reflects my personal opinion only and does not represent the opinions or policy of the BC Electronic Library Network or the Simon Fraser University Library.

Sunday, October 09, 2005

One of the quandaries for funding agencies wishing to mandate open access to the results of research they have funded, is that not all researchers currently enjoy the services of an institutional repository.

There are likely a number of ways of addressing this issue on a temporary basis. Here is one thought: why not investigate whether any of the libraries which already have an IR repository up and running would consider a contract to create a special section for the funding agency? This would provide a means of immediately addressing this situation, which may well be temporary in nature, at less cost than might be incurred if the funding agency were to set up their own central repository.

When the authors' own repository is up and running, the article(s) can then be copied to this IR. Similarly, once IR technology is more advanced and it becomes cheaper and easier for the funding agency to set up their own repository, then the items can be moved or copied from this temporary IR, to the funders' IR.

Comment from Peter Suber, Open Access News, Monday October 9, 2005: Another possibility is for universities with IRs to allow deposits by faculty from selected IR-less institutions. Another is for universities without individual IRs to launch a consortial IR. Another possibility, though still forthcoming, is the universal repository I'm helping to launch at the Internet Archive.

Thoughts on this would be appreciated, whether on one of the open access lists, or send directly to heatherm dot eln dot bc dot ca

This post reflects my personal opinion only and does not represent the opinions or policy of the BC Electronic Library Network or the Simon Fraser University Library.

first publication by a legal publisher (Irwin Law) in both commercial book and free online formats

the first national compilation of copyright scholarly opinion in Canada

the first time a book from such a publisher has been put together in time to respond and contribute directly to a policy process at the bill stage (thanks to Margaret Ann Wilkinson for this list)

The book begins with an introduction by Michael Geist. My fellow librarians and information policy aficionados may be interested to know that two joint Law and LIS scholars, Margaret Ann Wilkinson and Sam Trosow, from Western, are among the authors.

Sunday, October 02, 2005

This is the best model for an open access policy to date, in my opinion, particularly because open access is mandatory. A detailed, thoughtful analysis about why this is a model policy can be found in Peter Suber's October 2005 SPARC Open Access Newsletter.

One aspect that might not be optimum in the SSRHC context is the allowance for a delay of 6 months for open access. This is a very generous concession to the worried publishing community, which may not be necessary or desirable in the Canadian context.

Open access will make it possible to greatly expand and enhance the impact of the Canadian researcher. Instead of articles being readily accessible to subscribers only - likely a few individuals, Canada's research libraries, and some of the larger libraries abroad - open access means that Canadian research will be readily accessible to all researchers, everywhere.

Here is a scenario to illustrate how immediate open access can enhance the impact and prestige of the Canadian researcher. While pre-publication open access may be the optimum, for the sake of simplicity of comparison, this scenario assumes a SSHRC policy of mandatory OA immediately on publication, while another country, similar to Canada (X) permits a 6-month delay, which has become general practice.

Let's imagine that a Canadian researcher, and a researcher from X, have both completed similar studies, which resulted in similar findings. Everyone in this research area is very excited when they read the results of either study. Other researchers read and cite the studies, begin new studies based on the results, and some suggest that the author might be a good conference presenter,invite the author to participate in an international research team, or nominate the author for an award. For the researcher from X, this is primarily other researchers in X, and a few outsiders, while for the Canadian, this is this worldwide research community.

It is the work of the Canadian researcher which is more likely to be read and cited, and recognised in a number of ways. The Canadian researcher is looking good - and so is SSHRC, as the funder, and Canada as a whole.

Canada's Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council (SSHRC) adopted Open Access in principle in April 2005, and is presently seeking input on implementation measures. The deadline for this consultation process is October 31.

SSHRC is hearing from the publishers - let's make sure they hear from the rest of us, too!

University of Toronto's Open Source Open Access ProjectLinks to OS!OA and Dr. Gunther Eysenbach's responses to the SSHRC Consultation on Open Access.Excerpt (Dr. Eysenbach's response):With turning down the Journal of Medical Internet Research as a SSHRC funded journal only because at that time it didn’t have paying subscribers (because it is Open Access) SSHRC lost a tremendous opportunity to explore researcher-led experimental models of publishing. .Note: SSHRC rules at present are based on a subscription system, and discriminate against open access journals. Simply eliminating this discriminatory practice would do a lot to further open access in Canada!

Canadian library associations which have declared support for open access:Canadian Association of Research LibrariesCanadian Library Association (also Canadian Association of College and University Libraries)British Columbia Library Association

Canada's Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council (SSHRC) adopted Open Access in principle in April 2005, and is presently seeking input on implementation measures. The deadline for this consultation process is October 31.

SSHRC is hearing from the publishers - let's make sure they hear from the rest of us, too!

University of Toronto's Open Source Open Access ProjectLinks to OS!OA and Dr. Gunther Eysenbach's responses to the SSHRC Consultation on Open Access.Excerpt (Dr. Eysenbach's response):With turning down the Journal of Medical Internet Research as a SSHRC funded journal only because at that time it didn’t have paying subscribers (because it is Open Access) SSHRC lost a tremendous opportunity to explore researcher-led experimental models of publishing. .Note: SSHRC rules at present are based on a subscription system, and discriminate against open access journals. Simply eliminating this discriminatory practice would do a lot to further open access in Canada!

Canadian library associations which have declared support for open access:Canadian Association of Research LibrariesCanadian Library Association (also Canadian Association of College and University Libraries)British Columbia Library Association